Special Autonomy Volume 2 Must Be Continued For the Welfare of the Papuan People

There needs to be clear indicators to measure a failure or success achieved from the Papua Special Autonomy policy.

Secretary of the Papua Parliamentary Democratic Faction, Boy Markus Dawir, said that the people of Papua currently still enjoy a special autonomy policy, as stated in Law Number 21 of 2001 concerning Otsus for the Province of Papua.

Boy further said that this impact can be felt in the fields of government, politics, economy and especially in the three areas of superiority, namely community empowerment, education and health.

"When special autonomy is granted, of course many policies have been passed down from the Papua Provincial government to Regency / City Governments in 28 Regencies and 1 City in Papua," he said.

This policy certainly, Boy added, 80% of special autonomy funds were given to the regions and the Papua Provincial Government only managed 20%. All came to the attention of Papua Governor Lukas Enembe and Deputy Governor of Papua, Klemen Tinal.

They advised that the funds could be used directly for the needs of indigenous Papuans. Because regencies / cities have communities, while the Papua Provincial Government is only administrative.

"If so, then the amount of special autonomy funds that have been rolling and provided, should be an indicator in assessing a success or failure in the district / city, without having to assess in general terms from a situation. Therefore, the importance of an evaluation of programs and policies in translating the special autonomy funds given by the province to districts / cities, "he explained.

The answer to this question returned in an initial review, that the special autonomy fund had been given eighty percent to the region, so the community needed to ask what the Regent / Mayor was doing with these funds, with indicators that could be used in terms of development and siding with the community native to Papua.

"In order not to be easy we give a statement of special autonomy failed. It must be clear whether the province or district / city failed, "he said.

The public should not be trapped by an issue and provocation to always blame the situation and the government, but rather focus on providing input and solutions to the government that is directly in contact with the policy to the community.

For example, special autonomy funds given to districts / cities must be utilized as well as possible for indigenous people or indigenous Papuans, so naturally we can question the district / city government, whether what has been done during the Papua Special Autonomy is present with the launch of funds that have been given.

"The provincial government continues to consistently serve the needs of the community and the will of the people to live in prosperity, so that the second volume of Special Autonomy must be more serious to be supported together, understood together as an obligation and partisanship of the government to serve the community," he explained.

When people want a more prosperous welfare, of course the government is responsible, so the community should also obey the rules set, so that all is well coordinated and goes according to what is expected.

"As Papua's Special Autonomy runs because there is an impartial policy, it is time for all to support for better continuity, while arranging which parts need to be evaluated and updated for the welfare life of the people of Papua," concluded the Chairperson of the PD PPM Papua.